WCDefenseCA

Happy Friday, dear readers!

As we head into the weekend, your humble blogger brings you a brief update on the See’s Candy case.  As my beloved readers will recall, in the matter of Ek v. See’s Candies, the Court of Appeal held that plaintiff-widower can proceed in a civil tort action against her employer on a theory that her employer’s negligence caused her to transmit COVID19 to her husband, resulting in his death.

As yet another shameless plug, dear readers, if you missed the webinar on this issue drop me a line about reviewing the recorded version.

Anywho, all eyes were on the Supreme Court to see if there would be a new floodgate of asbestos-like litigation with employers researching the family tree and domestic living situation of every employee to test positive for COVID19.

Earlier this week, the California Supreme Court declined to review the decision, meaning that the case can proceed rather than being dismissed outright.

And here we are dear readers – your humble blogger’s suggestions stand regarding calling for an increased level of cooperation between workers’ compensation defense teams and civil liability defense teams to make sure the defense of one case does not prejudice the defense of the other.

Have a great weekend!

Happy Tuesday, dear readers! Your humble blogger is breathing hard trying to recover form his over-indulgence in celebrating Pi day yesterday, and hopefully you got to enjoy as well!

Tomorrow is Wednesday, 3/16 and your humble blogger is giving a webinar presentation with noted colleague H. Douglas Hawkins, Jr., Esq. on the impact of the case of Matilde Ek v. See’s Candies, Inc. and claims handling.

Info and link are below and here’s hoping you will join us!

Please join us for March’s CE webinar!

March 16th – 10:00am “COVID Update” A discussion of the See’s Candies decision and the impact on COVID-19 claims (1.0 CEU – CA Adjuster) In the case of Matilde Ek v. See’s Candies Inc., the Court of Appeal allowed an employee of See’s Candies Inc. to proceed with her claim for civil tort remedies after she allegedly was exposed to COVID-19 at work and brought it home to her husband. COVID-19 is presenting a new arena of liability for employers and tilts the scales of accepting and settling questionable industrial COVID-19 claims as an economics decision. Managing Partner Gregory Grinberg, Esq. and Senior Associate Attorney H. Douglas Hawkins Jr., Esq. will discuss the impact of the See’s Candies decision and tactics for addressing industrial COVID19 claims with the impact of this decision in mind. CLICK HERE TO REGISTER! *If you experience difficulty registering please try to copy and paste the following link into your internet browser (Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox work best):  https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/6774531364777865230 or email Scott@galesutow.com to register.

Happy Friday dear readers!

Another week is winding down – a special hello and thank you to all the wonderful people that made the WCRC conference in Dana Point such a memorable one, particularly as it had been so long since your humble blogger risked venturing out to gather with his fellow workers’ compensation creatures.  Hopefully, dear readers, our paths will cross at the conference next years.

In any case, if you can’t hang out with the humble blogger right this moment, perhaps I can interest you in a humble blogpost instead?

Well, let’s talk about the most-cursed beer in the world right now: Corona!  Your humble blogger theorized in this blog post that industrial COVID deaths resulting in transmission to and death of the employee’s family members could possibly follow the path of asbestos and pursue remedies against the employer in civil court rather than through the workers’ compensation system.  Well, the Kuciemba case seemed to shut that theory down, granting defendant’s petition for dismissal.

Now a different case is working it way through the court system: Matilde Ek v. See’s Candies Inc.  Plaintiff Ms. Ek was an employee of See’s Candies Inc. where she allegedly contracted Covid19.  She brought Covid home to her family, and her husbanded sadly passed as a result of the infection.

See’s Candies (my favorite is the dark cherry in chocolate, and if it’s not your favorite then, sadly, dear reader, you are wrong) sought a demurrer, arguing that any of Ms. Ek’s claims are derivivate of her workers’ compensation claims, and must be confined to the realm of workers’ compensation.  Ms. Ek’s attorneys argued, however, that despite her being a vector for the disease, she was claiming damages distinct from her own Covid suffering, but based on the death of her husband. 

The case is now up on appeal as to whether a demurrer is appropriate, as the trial level court denied defendant’s demurrer. 

In other words, dear readers, if you’ve been thinking to yourself that you really wish there were 2am TV commercials looking for clients who may have gotten COVID from a family member who got it from work… you are in luck!  Have a great weekend!